About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
the most extreme element in their own party through the primary processes, and that's why harry reid right now is running the senate. >> but there are -- i mean, you saw the front page of the business section of "the new york times" yesterday. there are people who want these assault weapons, and they're selling off the shelves at twice the price. twice the price. i was online looking at guns. it's unbelievable how they're marketed. people like them. people in america feel they need these multiple -- what's that? >> did you buy one? >> no, i was just trying to understand. i personally don't get it. but there is -- it's not just an extreme fringe tiny bit of society. there are people out there who support this. >> i tell you what. >> in our society. >> there aren't enough of those people out there that feel like they have to have an assault weapon to carry presidential elections or senate elections. >> there's enough to make gun manufacturers a lot of money, to make the gun lobby powerful, to make people like wayne la bpie e pierre -- >> think about the money he makes by ginning up fear in a
be a complete victory over barack obama and harry reid. and some republicans say just let the sequester happen, let the cuts happen. he says it is understandable because going to the trouble of fixing the sequester would be fixable, and the effort to do so would create strains in the republican congress. but what is understandable is not always responsible, allowing the sequester to go into effect would be deeply irresponsible. steve, deeply irresponsible has never been a winning argument with the house republicans. it has never scared them. >> but i guess, this is an interesting division in the republican party with the rise of the tea party. because the republican party has traditionally been the protector of the defense contracts. there is a conservative part that says to heck with them, we're in favor of big sweeping cuts but we're also okay with big sweeping cuts to the defense department. then you have big crystal, john mccain even floating the idea maybe he would be okay with more revenue as long as it meant getting the revenue off the sequester. the interesting thing here, march one is
to the left that they can't-- all right i've got to go. >> the bills have been passed and harry reid won't bring them up. if you want to compromise get in the game and-- >> we've had that debate and the two parties see it very differently. in any event, kind of depressing, isn't it? and thanks for being here, though. thanks for being here. and maybe this will cheer you up, can you sue your parents for not loving you enough? we'll investigate that next. >> kelly's court is back in session. a 32-year-old man accusing his parents not loving him enough as a child so he's suing them for a hefty allowance. bernard bay is homeless and yet an aspiring record mogul. he blames his parents for his situation and saying they weren't loving or nurturing at all when he was a child and now he's asking a judge to force him to pay up claiming $200,000 should set things right. his mother says, bernard, get a job. adding that she has had a lifetime of old bernard and she's done. can you really sue for this? jonna spilbor is a former prosecutor and now defense attorney and julia is a former prosecutor and n
. majority leader harry reid hates it. 13 majority leader harry reid hates it. they created it. imagine how the rest of us feel about it. somehow our leaders cannot seem to figure a way out of it. we all agree the country needs to find a more sustainable fiscal path. in my view, we need a balanced approach, as wes said, that includes both spending and revenues. cuts in spending should focus on programs a growing the most, not on discretionary spending, which is not growing, is not the problem, and yet has already borne the brunt of cuts. the discretionary spending is a part of the budget where america's future lies, including such investment as research and education. cutting invesart ent in our fute is not the way to solve this problem. yet that is exactly what the sequester will do. there is a better way. we have talked about the impact of the sequester on an economy that is still recovering. i want to focus on the longer term, the economy and the nation that we will leave to our children, our grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. the research being cut with the sequester affects long-t
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)